Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.

[Brietta]

I don't get your reasoning.  Someone carrying a child was seen by a group of people, not just one person.

There are people who are totally into the most bizarre conspiracy theories centring on the Drs McCann and their companions. 

There are many inconsistencies and anomalies surrounding this sighting imo.  Many more than have been manufactured around Jane Tanner’s sighting and she has been called a liar many times. 

Dr Kate McCann is on record as finding the Smith family sighting compelling because it so completely mirrored Jane’s sighting … and the Smiths did not know about Jane’s sighting at the time??

Mibbes aye ... mibbes naw ...

Read them and compare ... similar to the point of ...

Witness testimony of Martin Smith taken 2007/05/26 (26th of May)
"Urged, he states that the individual did not appear to be a tourist. He cannot explain this further. It was simply his perception given the individual's clothing."
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm

Processos Vol I
Pages 42 – 50
Witness Statement
Jane Michelle Tanner
Date 11h30, 04 May 2007
By the way he was dressed, he gave her the impression that he was not a tourist, because he was very "warmly dressed".
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id261.html#tap2

[Brietta]

If SY had a lookalike suspect in the frame, why didn't they carry out the necessary interviews BEFORE carrying out all those digs? None of the 4 arguidos fits both the age-group & hair-colouring of Smithman.

I am perplexed about who exactly provided the information for such clear efits, because the three witness statements we have seen from the files make it clear they were unable to do so.

Like you in an earlier post ... why has no one come forward to identify him from what is an almost photographic image?

[misty]

There are people who are totally into the most bizarre conspiracy theories centring on the Drs McCann and their companions. 

There are many inconsistencies and anomalies surrounding this sighting imo.  Many more than have been manufactured around Jane Tanner’s sighting and she has been called a liar many times. 

Dr Kate McCann is on record as finding the Smith family sighting compelling because it so completely mirrored Jane’s sighting … and the Smiths did not know about Jane’s sighting at the time??

Mibbes aye ... mibbes naw ...

Read them and compare ... similar to the point of ...

Witness testimony of Martin Smith taken 2007/05/26 (26th of May)
"Urged, he states that the individual did not appear to be a tourist. He cannot explain this further. It was simply his perception given the individual's clothing."
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm

Processos Vol I
Pages 42 – 50
Witness Statement
Jane Michelle Tanner
Date 11h30, 04 May 2007
By the way he was dressed, he gave her the impression that he was not a tourist, because he was very "warmly dressed".
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id261.html#tap2

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm#p6p1615
Jeremy explained that he used the crêche facility provided by the resort. This was a child care facility which allowed parents to leave their children, aged between 3 – 5 yrs old, with trained staff at various times of the day. He recalled walking to the crêche with Gerry who had left Madeleine with the staff. This was about 1230 hrs on Tues 1 May. He then went on to explain that the children could be left with the staff during the evening and that most would be picked up before 10pm. It was not an unusual sight to see people walking through the site at night with a child in their arms asleep. The crêche would also provide a blanket to cover the child if required. He had taken up this facility hence his knowledge of the procedure

Both Tannerman & Smithman were dressed in warm clothing, yet neither child was covered by a blanket.
Tannerman has apparently been identified as an innocent tourist who appears not to have been too bothered about keeping his sleeping child warm on its trip through the streets. What are the odds of another person, innocent or otherwise, walking the streets  in the opposite direction with a pyjama-clad child & no blanket?

[Eleanor]

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm#p6p1615
Jeremy explained that he used the crêche facility provided by the resort. This was a child care facility which allowed parents to leave their children, aged between 3 – 5 yrs old, with trained staff at various times of the day. He recalled walking to the crêche with Gerry who had left Madeleine with the staff. This was about 1230 hrs on Tues 1 May. He then went on to explain that the children could be left with the staff during the evening and that most would be picked up before 10pm. It was not an unusual sight to see people walking through the site at night with a child in their arms asleep. The crêche would also provide a blanket to cover the child if required. He had taken up this facility hence his knowledge of the procedure

Both Tannerman & Smithman were dressed in warm clothing, yet neither child was covered by a blanket.
Tannerman has apparently been identified as an innocent tourist who appears not to have been too bothered about keeping his sleeping child warm on its trip through the streets. What are the odds of another person, innocent or otherwise, walking the streets  in the opposite direction with a pyjama-clad child & no blanket?

I have never been convinced that the man Jane Tanner saw was in fact an innocent father.  The direction from The Night Creche was totally opposite to what it should have been.

[pathfinder73]

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm#p6p1615
Jeremy explained that he used the crêche facility provided by the resort. This was a child care facility which allowed parents to leave their children, aged between 3 – 5 yrs old, with trained staff at various times of the day. He recalled walking to the crêche with Gerry who had left Madeleine with the staff. This was about 1230 hrs on Tues 1 May. He then went on to explain that the children could be left with the staff during the evening and that most would be picked up before 10pm. It was not an unusual sight to see people walking through the site at night with a child in their arms asleep. The crêche would also provide a blanket to cover the child if required. He had taken up this facility hence his knowledge of the procedure

Both Tannerman & Smithman were dressed in warm clothing, yet neither child was covered by a blanket.
Tannerman has apparently been identified as an innocent tourist who appears not to have been too bothered about keeping his sleeping child warm on its trip through the streets. What are the odds of another person, innocent or otherwise, walking the streets  in the opposite direction with a pyjama-clad child & no blanket?

Looks like a blanket to me.

[misty]

Looks like a blanket to me.

OK, I MAY concede that point (even though I'm not seeing PINK pyjamas in that picture). If the blanket was covering the little girl's chest then it probably wasn't visible to Jane.
But, as Eleanor has pointed out, he was heading towards the creche location, not away from it. I was going to suggest that maybe the father was on his way to the creche rather than returning from it, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

[jassi]

I have never been convinced that the man Jane Tanner saw was in fact an innocent father.  The direction from The Night Creche was totally opposite to what it should have been.

You think that SY are wrong, then ?

[ferryman]

There is supposed to be much hype around a "missing" blanket.

Could that be the one Kate gave to the Portuguese dog-handlers so they could prime their dogs with Madeleine's scent?

[Eleanor]

You think that SY are wrong, then ?

Not necessarily.  As in all things with this case, more detail is required, but I don't expect to get it.  Too much distortion and misinformation has happened to fully understand what actually went on.  To this day proven myths are still being stated as fact.

[faithlilly]

Not necessarily.  As in all things with this case, more detail is required, but I don't expect to get it.  Too much distortion and misinformation has happened to fully understand what actually went on.  To this day proven myths are still being stated as fact.

On both sides.

[slartibartfast]

On both sides.

Very true.

[Benice]

Not necessarily.  As in all things with this case, more detail is required, but I don't expect to get it.  Too much distortion and misinformation has happened to fully understand what actually went on.  To this day proven myths are still being stated as fact.

I'm sure SY will have interviewed the father identified from the Creche records at great length.  As we don't know what transpired during that interview - then IMO we don't have enough information to form any definite opinions ourselves.      Although it would appear that what he said was convincing enough for SY to believe that this was compelling evidence that he was almost certainly the man JT saw.

On the other hand it's hard to ignore the many similarities in the descriptions of the man and child given by JT and the Smiths - particularly as neither party had any prior knowledge of the other's description when they gave them.   It seems a massive coincidence to me, but then massive coincidences do happen -  so who knows.

[John]

Now if the mccanns had gone public at that time, they would open themselves to prosecution.


and that state of affairs should still stand.

As to the P.I.'s, what did they find that has resulted in any real progress in solving Madeleine's disappearance ?

That's a good point Stephen and one I haven't seen mentioned in this thread previously.  I make no excuses for using the word 'withheld' btw because that is exactly what happened...they were withheld...question is...by whom?

My own view is that the images were just too similar to Gerry and we all know what speculations that would have alighted had they found their way into the public domain.  Notice how Redwood goes out of his way to insist that neither the McCanns or their friends are suspects or persons of interest before releasing the e-fits.

[John]

I'm sure SY will have interviewed the father identified from the Creche records at great length.  As we don't know what transpired during that interview - then IMO we don't have enough information to form any definite opinions ourselves.      Although it would appear that what he said was convincing enough for SY to believe that this was compelling evidence that he was almost certainly the man JT saw.

On the other hand it's hard to ignore the many similarities in the descriptions of the man and child given by JT and the Smiths - particularly as neither party had any prior knowledge of the other's description when they gave them.   It seems a massive coincidence to me, but then massive coincidences do happen -  so who knows.

Redwood has purposely avoided attempting to explain why the so-called Innocentman was walking in the wrong direction on a cold May night with a scantily clad youngster in outstretched arms.  For me this just doesn't add up.

[sadie]

Redwood has purposely avoided attempting to explain why the so-called Innocentman was walking in the wrong direction on a cold May night with a scantily clad youngster in outstretched arms.  For me this just doesn't add up.

I agree John.

It doesn't add up in so many ways.  Maybe he is trying to get everyone talking about it to field ideas and further information about innocentman and/or bundleman?